BF2S Forums Tyranny, torture legalized - Detainee bill passes - Bush FTW

[n00b]Tyler wrote:

=CA=lamcrmbem wrote:

Ikarti wrote:

How many of you are going to defend it when it just explicitly says "You have no rights"

And it says that where?  Quote please?  Seriously, come on, less hysterics, more intelligence.

its true, if your too fucking stupid to get this: the Us goverment can do WHATEVER they want with a suspected terrorist as long as they want, thats no rights.

In fact they can do it even if they aren't a terrorist.

Wave goodbye to liberty....

davespanzer777 wrote:

Guys if you aint got shit to hide don't worry about it. If your doing something that fucked up then, stop doing it or get the fuck out of the country.   Go fuckin live in china if you dont like the new Law, THIS WORLD IS FUCKED.....................................

Problem is with this law you don't have to be doing anything wrong, you just need to be suspected of it.

Bertster7 wrote:

Wave goodbye to liberty....

Why are you waving you don't live here.  This doesn't concern you.

If you read the bill's text you would understand there is no liberty being waved goodbye too.

One word: isolationism. F*ck all you A-holes. One way to get America out of world issues is for the world to get off its ass and start accepting responsability or better yet accountability. The places that live in crisis are that way because of themselves. The US has nothing to with it. See, now im pissed. So to all those saying "America has become the world evil" i say, sus mi tub!!

Who here has read the enitre bill?

Colfax wrote:

jonsimon wrote:

starman7 wrote:

I'm of the belief that half the people who passed it never even read the damn bill.  They just think, "Security bill... it'll look good, PASS!"  I cannot believe that this bill will pass the Supreme Court, it explicitly revokes the right of Habeas Corpus, which can only be revoked in times of war by the President.  Congress has not declared war, and it isn't just the President who is able to authorize this.  This is a law which violates the Constitution, plain and simple.  I can't believe that Washington has become so much of a mess that it does this sort of thing just to get votes.

It can't make it to the supreme court if there are no trials from which to appeal.

Colfax re-enters thread to show how old jonsimon is:


http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v655/ … lances.jpg

So you either failed your 11th grade American History test which means you didn't graduate from Highschool (because it is a requirement to pass) or you're not quite there yet.

Checks and Balances

That chart doesn't describe the process through which the supreme court may make that decision. They don't just decide a law is unconstitutional.

BTW Passed my required US Gov and the AP US history test. Sorry.

Colfax wrote:

jonsimon wrote:

That chart doesn't describe the process through which the supreme court may make that decision. They don't just decide a law is unconstitutional.

BTW Passed my required US Gov and the AP US history test. Sorry.

From Chart wrote:

The Supreme Court over Congress:
May declare acts of congress unconstitutional

Yes they do.

Documented case of the supreme court declaring a law unconstitutional without being confronted through a legal dispute or the appeals process?

The_Shipbuilder wrote:

(T)eflon(S)hadow wrote:

The_Shipbuilder: Where is the provision for Pardon in the bill, for President Bush and the rest of his administration? This is your claim based on some CNN journalist  opinion, from this post: http://forums.bf2s.com/viewtopic.php?id=46172

Try here

Section 8 of HR 6054 (the revised bill approved by the Senate) wrote:

SEC. 8. RETROACTIVE APPLICABILITY.

      This Act shall take effect on the date of the enactment of this Act and shall apply retroactively, including--

            (1) to any aspect of the detention, treatment, or trial of any person detained at any time since September 11, 2001;

I think it would be pretty difficult to argue that this provision is intended to do anything other than clear the President and his administration of any previous wrongdoing.

I'm sure they'll try.

CameronPoe wrote:

Great post Shipbuilder. The United States of America officially died with the passing of that bill. The power to indefinitely hold ANYONE without trial, with the ability to carry out very broadly defined coercion techniques, concentrated in the hands of those who are generally the most corrupt in the country - politicians. Hang your heads in shame and don't expect any sympathy when the terrorists do likewise to your brethren. You are now morally equivalent.

You should be celebrating if America died, right?  So now the terrorists will start doing bad things to Americans, hope they don't fly planes into buildings or cut off heads.  Awwww, no sympathy from Cameron anymore, And us Americans just live for sympathy when we're attacked and always look for Europe to come save us.  If America is now the moral equivalent of the terrorists, that should be a step up in your opinion, right? 

Your posts always cheer me up Cameron.  Did you buy a set of Castro Ears while in Cuba?

Last edited by Major_Spittle (2006-09-29 15:23:06)

DesertFox423 wrote:

jonsimon wrote:

DesertFox423 wrote:

Up to debate if speaking out is action or not?

Um. It has been the primary weapon of the activist for all of history. Hippies, Luther, Jesus, the list is long.

I can debate that hippies accomplished nothing. Luther printed his findings instead and worked for a correction. He was not, however, simply narrating the actions of the church.

Luther began a revolution through nothing but the spoken or written word. Jesus started a religion with less. Hippies were simply one of the most recent and notable examples of outspoken activists.

The_Shipbuilder wrote:

(T)eflon(S)hadow wrote:

The_Shipbuilder: Where is the provision for Pardon in the bill, for President Bush and the rest of his administration? This is your claim based on some CNN journalist  opinion, from this post: http://forums.bf2s.com/viewtopic.php?id=46172

Try here

Section 8 of HR 6054 (the revised bill approved by the Senate) wrote:

SEC. 8. RETROACTIVE APPLICABILITY.

      This Act shall take effect on the date of the enactment of this Act and shall apply retroactively, including--

            (1) to any aspect of the detention, treatment, or trial of any person detained at any time since September 11, 2001;

I think it would be pretty difficult to argue that this provision is intended to do anything other than clear the President and his administration of any previous wrongdoing.

It is pretty clear to me if you take into context what the Military Commission Act of 2006 is about its purpose in being a new law, it is clearly defined.

Sec.8 of HR 6054 had to be put in the Bill, or provision as you describe it. This whole Act give the US Constitutional rights and power, that we never had before this being passed into law. Why do we need this new law, you might ask.  Well back in September of 2001, the 11th to be exact, this country was attacked like never before, by an enemy we had been blind to for, too long. If some genius would of had the forethought to write this law before then or directly after, we wouldn't be talking about this right now. You see, we didn't have any law describing the power and the due process this clearly allows for. We signed the Geneva Conventions Act, when? 50 years ago, this Bill was created , because the Geneve Conventions didnt have the experience of a nation being attacked, by a force that is described in that Act. It didn't exist, and it wasn't needed.

Now the RETROACTIVE APPLICABILITY, clearly give the US Government and its agencies to carry out plans in accordance under the US Constitution. It also clearly describes the due process in a Military Court Tribunal. (All kinds of boring reading if you want to indulge further.) Therefore, this Bill, and even the "provision" you state, has nothing to do with Pardoning the President of the United States, any White House Official, or any Member of the Armed Forces.

Mr. The_Shipbuilder, you didn't hit the nail-on-the head on this one, sorry. I hope you bring forth better information in the future, that people might actually believe to be a true fact.

Cheers *pours another one*

Last edited by (T)eflon(S)hadow (2006-09-29 15:36:05)

The_Shipbuilder wrote:

=CA=lamcrmbem wrote:

The_Shipbuilder wrote:

Where do you get the "shooting, bombing, killing" part?

Ok...since you're too thick or just being disagreable...

Main Entry: hos·til·i·ty (From the Meriam Webster Dictionary)
Pronunciation: hä-'sti-l&-tE
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural -ties
1 a : deep-seated usually mutual ill will b (1) : hostile action (2) plural : overt acts of warfare : WAR

Shooting, Bombing, Killing = WARFARE........FTW

Again, where did you get the shooting, bombing and killing part? I didn't see it in that Webster dictionary entry.

And even if you are able to google something up, that may be how an Internet dictionary defines it, but Internet dictionaries have no legal bearing in American courts. American courts abide by the law.

The bill we're talking about here does not define "hostilities". YOU may define it as shooting, bombing or killing, but YOUR definition doesn't matter. The term is undefined, therefore it is left open to the Pentagon as to what constitutes "hostilities".

LOL...ROFL....that is so horrendously bad logic I can't stop laughling.   Cause everyone at the Pentagon is stupid and can read a dictionary and doesn't know the meaning of "hostilities."  Oh wait...most of the Pentagon are military officers with degrees, many from service academies (they're the dumb ones).